Clergy differ on bill to repeal the Johnson Amendment

By Mark Pattison |
Catholic News Service

2/07/17

People gather for the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington Feb. 3. CNS

WASHINGTON — People of goodwill can disagree on matters of public
policy — even if they're ordained clergy, and the public policy under debate
has the potential to affect the way they conduct their ministry.

The issue is the Johnson Amendment, a 1954 rider inserted by
then-Sen. Lyndon Johnson into that year's version of the tax code banning all
federally recognized nonprofit organizations — including religious
organizations — from endorsing candidates and otherwise participating in
partisan political activity at the risk of losing their tax-exempt status.

The Republican Party made repeal of the amendment a plank in its
2016 convention platform, and President Donald Trump vowed Feb. 2 at the
National Prayer Breakfast to "get rid of and totally destroy" the
Johnson Amendment.

Rep. Jody Hice, R-Georgia, a second-term congressman and a
co-sponsor of the Free Speech Fairness Act, as the Johnson Amendment repeal
bill has been named, is a former Southern Baptist minister who thinks repeal is
a good idea.

Rabbi Jack Moline, president of the Interfaith Alliance, believes
repeal would create more problems than it tries to solve.

Until about a decade ago, "I would receive threatening
letters" from the IRS that said "we would lose our tax-exempt status
if we reviewed political issues," Hice told Catholic News Service Feb. 3.
Those letters, he added, were "very threatening, very chilling."

Then, in 2008, Hice said, he and 32 other clergy issued
endorsements from their pulpits, recorded those endorsements, sent them to the
IRS and challenged them to do something about it. The IRS never responded, so
Hice was part of a group — this time numbering 160 — that did the same thing
the next year. Again, no response. Now, every year, the Alliance Defending
Freedom coordinates a similar event.

"Churches have censored themselves right out of participation,
right out of keeping their congregations informed," Hice said. With the
Johnson Amendment repealed, "you could address the issues, in my case,
from a biblical perspective, and actually endorse a candidate (whose views)
that we as a congregation share without fear of losing tax-exempt status or
being threatened in any way."

Hice added the bill would not permit churches to conduct
political activities outside of "the normal course of your ministry."
"No-full-page ads" in newspapers would be allowed, although putting
something in the church bulletin is OK, he said.

Rabbi Moline, though, believes the opposite to be true.

The bill "would make religious institutions destinations for
dark money for political purposes. Since they are 501(c)(3) (shorthand for a
federal rule governing nonprofits), they are not only tax-exempt but
tax-deductible," he told CNS Feb. 3. "People who give money to PACs,
which have come under attack, will now be able to give money to a 501(c)(3)
with less accountability, and the ability to compromise the mission of a house
of God," if the bill became law.

Repealing the Johnson Amendment, Rabbi Moline said, would
"create a campaign political atmosphere in houses of worship all over the
country. It's important for people of faith to understand their tradition, but
to be sheltered from having to express those values in a political way."

Rabbi Moline added that under the bill, "the government
would essentially be funding campaign activities through the tax base, actually
reducing — twice — the amount of money that would otherwise be collected in
taxes. They would be exempt from taxes by the institution and also by the
contributor."

Tim Delaney, National Council of Nonprofits president, voiced "strong
opposition" to the repeal bill. "Nonprofits are already free to
exercise their First Amendment rights to advocate for their missions," he
said in a Feb. 2 statement. "Allowing political operatives to push for
endorsements would put nonprofits in a position where they become known as
Democratic charities or Republican charities and put missions at risk."